Private Duty

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has changed its stance and will now, once again, find that two or more entities are joint employers of a single workforce if they share or determine together matters governing the essential terms and conditions of employment.

The recent change means that an employer could be a “joint employer” if there is evidence of indirect control, even when no evidence of direct control exists.

This reinstates the NLRB’s stance from late 2015 through December 2017.

“What it means is that franchisers and any home health or home care agency that does shared staffing of its employees are back at risk under that broad definition of what a joint employer means,” says Eileen Maguire, attorney at Indianapolis-based Gilliland, Maguire & Harper, P.C.

The standard is broad, and agencies must continue to take steps to ensure they are not exercising — or reserving the right to — control over employees of another agency in areas such as hiring, firing, discipline, compensation determination, scheduling, staffing, supervision or direction.

In August 2015, NLRB decided in Browning-Ferris Industries of California, Inc., that it would now evaluate whether an employer affects, either directly or indirectly, the means or manner of employees’ work and the conditions of employment when it decides which businesses are considered joint employers.

In December 2017, the NLRB overruled its prior decision in a 3-2 ruling.

But a client in the Browning-Ferris case is represented by NLRB board member William Emanuel’s former law firm. That represented a potential conflict of interest, and Emanuel should have recused himself from the 2017 decision, according a Feb. 9 memo from NLRB Inspector General David Berry.

The memo notes that Emanuel’s participation in the ruling “exposes a serious and flagrant problem and/or deficiency in the board’s administration of its deliberative process and the National Labor Relations Act … that should immediately be brought to the attention of Congress and addressed by the board.”

As a result of the memo, at the end of February the board vacated the change it made in December 2017. — Kirsten Dize (kdize@decisionhealth.com)

Featured Free Resource

Are you prepared to prevent financial burden under PDGM? To ensure success, agencies must take actionable steps now to fully understand exactly how the new Patient-Driven Groupings Model will impact coding scenarios and how these updates will affect revenue cycle.

Free Resources

What will your revenue and expenses look like for a Medicare Part A resident admitted under PDPM? Find out with this free questionnaire from The Association for Medicare Billing and Reimbursement (AMBR) for Long-Term Care.

The way agencies get paid and aspects of almost all areas of business will completely shift under the new Patient-Driven Groupings Model (PDGM). We’ve partnered with industry experts and rounded up crucial action-items you won’t want to overlook as you prepare for this massive change.

Are you prepared to prevent financial burden under PDGM? To ensure success, agencies must take actionable steps now to fully understand exactly how the new Patient-Driven Groupings Model will impact coding scenarios and how these updates will affect revenue cycle.

Complimentary Networking Event for Post-Acute Leaders

Our upcoming Post-Acute Forum takes place November 18 & 19, 2019 in Phoenix, AZ. This complimentary event is specifically designed for decision-makers at skilled nursing facilities and home health agencies.